National Republican., 1887-08-10

water iund, for each year from 1873 to 1881, in
clusive, stating the amount received fr0n each
SbSt n,,rposn fS, ~. money @ has bsrn exp"nded
IL must he apparent to any one In the least
acquainted with public affairs that to prepare
the information In answer 10 such resolution
was u v ork of great magnitude.
The allegation that the answer IN II, con-
tnined In Senate Ex. Doc. l0i, ID session, 4Sth
Congress, Twas the work OF about four hours
lor a competent clerk" Is In keeping with the
other statements. The criticisms on the book
keeping OF the water department Apply only
to the period covered by the report prior to the
organization of the present system of govern.
meni, and when the department was und T
The charge Of water registrar who, for, por-
tiOn of the time, was also collector OF water
charges as well az the discussing officer,
Statements are made that ut will be seen by
this reply OF the commissioners to the Senate
refoluton that the expenditures for laying
water mains from December |, 1875, to June 30,
1884, were si92, ,gs0.i7, and that there are some
small expenditures which may bs charged
the laying of mains" The facts are that this
amount of si92 800 II includes, besides the cost
of procuring ana laying new mains, all the ex-
Ing in repair Of fire plugs, hydtants,
a., q lss S iSo IN. miles s;o,,,Sl q water wa, msin,,
water mains and service pipes, and changes
in LOCATION OF fire. plugs, hydrants, &c, rem.
dered necessary BY CHANCES in grade OF
| penses Of inspection, the finding aud supsres.
sion Of leaks and waste the gathering Of data
for fixing the water rents, providing and
water 10 premises, the putting. in OF service
| pipes to the curb in streets to be paved, &c.
Seven years oa, of the S. nine |, also includes al
| Washington hieh-service pumping sta
tions, fer fuel, engineer, iiremep,
| purchase and laying OF mains, vary from
t25 900 10 $4,000 per year, as will appear from
the following data:
A considerable proportion OF these expenses
arose nom the poor character Of the materials
| furnished and work done under the old board
| of public works. During the period from De
ase Weqo eng
| pended sl0l III So for "iaying water mains"
Now the fact is that this sum included the entire
peilod with the exception of the regular salary
roll Of s72S2.io, coptii gent expenses s97l.36,
and the new high.service pump for George
Rnhng this Psred eo hSrs u, were
| pipe aud e,52i feet OF s inch pipe, almost ii
| miles of new pipe. Out Of this sum was paid
the pumping expenses & OF the o. Georgetown stsS :
the water service. Out of this sum were also
poid the expenses OF an elaborate water sur.
yey OF the city. The tabulated reports Of this
| survey cover thirty-eight RACES Of Registrar
Lubey's printed report, aud give In each square
OF the city the number OF houses aud water
wser closets & bath @ tubs urnas % SINKS Hs engines 3.
| fountains. spigots, by ydrants &C.. and show tho
| number of fixtures In order and those out of
| repair. There are no data available to deter
| amounted 10 many thousands of dollars, al
| though the Information was never used as q
The records of the water office were not kept
at this time in such manner as to per NIT a
determination OF the sums expended for differ
in which the records have been % more S perfectly S
| kept, 1t Ia fair TO assume that the expenses of
the department for the period In question.
laying Of new mains, and paid for out OF Of the the
sl0l III 49, was about s47 900, leaving S5i. i7l53
as the cost Of laying b7,8j5 feet of mains of the
| sizes hereinbefore stated.
II was not until the present form of the Dis.
irict government became fairly established. In
lS7S-'79, that the records of the water office
satisiac@,ory Glory de,eTminstion @ Of tho costs CO Of the
different classes Of work to be arrived at now.
A comparison Of the actual amount OF pipe
laid. WITH the cost there Of, for the years ending
June so, 1889, 1883, aud 1881, with the amounts
alleged TO have been expended for that .pur-
ro.e, will show how wantonly the facts have
During the year 1ssl.'s2 there were laid ,02o
feet Of 6:inch pipe at cost Of ,75i.5s. instead
of s45.st7.s4, as alleged. During the year
pipe at cost Of 81, ,i5i 66, instead Of sSi, ,2iDis
as alleged. Besides this there were laid /, ,G75
feet of u. inch pipe and connection for the
er %bab % he Wa
made o D Dnring the Year isss there were laid
8.072 feet of 6inch pipe and ,038 feet Of 12inch
Instead Of s$$, $,ssi bs. as alleged. Aggreeatins;
these, instead of there having been si92, aSa. II
expended for the laying ofwater mains during
there has been in reality not more than sis5,.
coo to $4,000 so expended This accords rea-
sonably well with the amount received from
s2iI,5o77G, and entirely disposes OF ali criiii-
cism found, d on tho alleged discrepancies In
the cost OF laying of mains AMI tho receipts
from water main taxes.
| II is proper T. state that, In the reply OF the
commiss!onersto to Senator Morgan's resolutions.
the expenditures were given under the 'head
he incurred for % d,erent M classes 20 Sol Of
| work, such as laying new mains, repairing old
ones. flre.pugss, inspection, &c. It has been
some Of the items in The water department ap.
| propriation bill. and then TO make an omnibus
Item covering all other necessary expenses.
there was appropriated for salaries. $3.50; for
| contingent expenses, s2,t00; for interest and
| sinking fund on water stock bonds. sii,6l0; for
suppiy' s57. $500. and for pumping EXPENSE
and pipe distribution. s750O, This later
item was intended by Congress to covcr all ex-
| dcrstood by the water Office, and has been SO
construed by the officials OF the treasury.
| The published allega ion is that "there has
| been stolen, or misappropriated, more than
100000 Of the Waterman tax fund" and the
| proof offered is that, by s'arting with the sum
of S92, ,96S i5 reported by Register Cox as stand
| ing on the books OF the department as out
| standing water-main taxes and interest then
| June so, 1SS0) due certain sums are added
| for cost Of water mains for the six years end
ing June 80, 1881, 49, 83. '8i, 'S5, S6. making a
total of 1926 0l7 35; from these arc subtracted
| the receipts for water main taxes during these
years aggregating Sl24 .GSi.3 and the statement
made that there should stand on the books as
due to the water department, exclusive of
profits and accrued interest, the sum of 1901,
S33.05, whereas in the report of the commits.
sioners the following sum, principal and in
terest, is stated to bo on the books as outstand,
ing Waterman taxes:
ARC ars. 10y
Interest on same. lo,3bio Oh
.0oU ii3 VI
making the ''steal, s3Ol 05. less $50, 7ls 81
or .82i0, ,5s9.5l. Now what are the facts
Starting from the same datum. the am)un.
stated by Registrar Cox as outstanding water.
main taxes due June 80, 1880, s9l05S Is, aud
adding to this the amount actually eXpendei
for laying water mains during tho Yeas in
question. we have
TRUE STATEMENT.
Y June so, 1880. Outstandi 3l0ja. Al
1881, Expended ...."...... sg7.st
| lShs ....s...... l,Iol.b
| 1883. ......,..... 3ibl ,bd
1871. .....u," 1O,llT III
" 1885. .........,...... 47,0t Al
" 1886. ............. q l,9i6.Si
|
1sn qQi ~